Peter Costello - hopeless one minute, a great appointment the next

LAURIE
OAKES: As predicted, Kevin Rudd's rewarded another Liberal. He's given
Peter Costello a job as a member of the Future Fund Board of Guardians.

Why is Mr Costello uniquely qualified for that job?

STEPHEN
SMITH: Well, he was Treasurer for over a decade. The requirements and
the duties of the governors of the Future Fund are set out, they're
well established and you can't be Treasurer of the Commonwealth for ten
years and not pick up the knowledge that you need. But also, no one's
ever disputed that Mr Costello is a person of abilities. So, the
appointment's made on merit. We think it's a good one and we think
he'll make a contribution.

We don't disqualify people just because they happen at some stage to have been political opponents.

LAURIE
OAKES: But the Labor Party spent 12 years, near enough, bagging Peter
Costello as Treasurer. They said he indeed failed to properly spend the
money from the boom. They said he ignored warning after warning from
the Reserve Bank about inflation. They said, basically, he was hopeless.

Yet, now he's a genius and we need to give him this job.

STEPHEN
SMITH: We had our criticisms of the Howard/Costello Government's
economic policies. But I don't think people dispute the fact that Peter
Costello does have ability and he's got relevant experience. So we
believe that on merit it's a decent appointment.

LAURIE OAKES:
Well, he's hopeless one minute, he's a decent appointment the next.
Doesn't this expose the hypocrisy of politics and politicians?

STEPHEN
SMITH: What it does do and what it shows, I think Laurie, is it is
possible after someone completes their time in Parliament or in a
Government, that you can look at these things objectively and
dispassionately and it's not inappropriate for someone who does have
ability to serve.

This is a national interest job. I don't
think anyone has ever doubted, irrespective of differences of policy or
politics, that people like Mr Costello, or for example, Mr Nelson, or
indeed Mr Beazley, won't put the national interest first when they're
asked to do these jobs after their time as Ministers and in the
Parliament.

So, we think he'll make a contribution and we think he'll serve that and play that national interest task.

LAURIE
OAKES: Well, you mentioned Kim Beazley's going to Washington. Apart
from him, all the jobs for the boys have gone to people in the
Coalition side. You're aware, aren't you, of growing resentment in the
ALP about that?

STEPHEN SMITH: Kim Beazley was a very fine
appointment. And the Prime Minister's made it clear that, irrespective
of past Parliamentary or Government service, that won't disqualify you.
The Prime Minister, quite rightly, wants to make appointments on merit.
He wants to find the best people for the best particular jobs. We
believe that Mr Nelson...

LAURIE OAKES: So all the best people are on the Coalition side?

STEPHEN SMITH: No, it's a matter of horses for courses, Laurie. It's a matter of the best people for particular jobs.

Mr
Nelson was very appropriately suited to the Brussels job because of his
experience as a Defence Minister and the importance of NATO to that
job. So, it doesn't mean that just because you happen to be a former
Member of Parliament that you get special treatment, nor does it mean
that you're disqualified.

We like to make these
appointments, and we do make these appointments, on merit and we try
and make sure that the person appointed is the best available person
for the job. That applies irrespective of politics.

LAURIE OAKES: And there's no resentment in the Labor Party about that?

STEPHEN
SMITH: Well, there are always views in the Labor Party about who should
be appointed where. One thing I am absolutely sure of is that there was
rejoicing in the Labor Party at Kim Beazley's appointment because that
was seen to be a most appropriate appointment.

LAURIE OAKES: A one off.

STEPHEN
SMITH: I wouldn't describe it in that way. It's, in very many respects,
one of our most important diplomatic appointments. He was uniquely
qualified for that job and the best person available and that's why we
appointed him.